Please note: we have been online over ten years, and we want The Trek BBS to continue as a free site. But if you block our ads we are at risk.Please consider unblocking ads for this site - every ad you view counts and helps us pay for the bandwidth that you are using. Thank you for your understanding.

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

Its funny, lots of Trekkies complain but the lack of total knowledge will get them going to see the movie despite their qualms, while the public at large will go see the movie regardless. Win-win.

I will not see it

Mr Pointy Ears wrote:

look like a standard big budget hollywood scifi action flick and not trek,the thing that harrison fly look like a supeup future helicopter.

I am not against ST looking like a big budget hollywood flic, but "seek out new civilizations" has been replaced by "seek out new special effects" "seek out new underwear" etc.

Romulan_spy wrote:

I think some Trek fans are just going to have to get used to the fact that it is 2013 not 1978! CGI and big action sequences are here to stay! Trek is changing, accept it!

Trek is not changing, this is not trek. They could have had the decency to call it Battlestar Enterprise, so people would know that this travesty has nothing to do with the vision Gene Roddenberry had, en what gave a lot of people the name Trekkies.

I think some Trek fans are just going to have to get used to the fact that it is 2013 not 1978! CGI and big action sequences are here to stay! Trek is changing, accept it!

THIS.

We also have to face the fact that trekkies moan and groan every chance they get. I well remember the bitching pre-TNG about everything under the sun, including the bald captain (as if Shatner was follicularly blessed, ever) and the idiot android

First and foremost, when it's a Paramount issued movie or series with the name "Star Trek", guess what? It's Star Trek!

Beyond that, why is there all is holiness about the "vision" Gene Roddenberry had, like it's supposed to be this utopia that even he was pumped up to believe by sycophants and followers over time?

Star Trek's base was to show that we would still be around a few hundred years from now and going further out into the galaxy than anyone now can ever dream, encountering the peril and wonder of what's out there!

Jeez, the first friggin' pilot had Pike threatening to snap The Keepers' neck if he kept up the illusions! How peaceful and understanding was that?

Trek is not changing, this is not trek. They could have had the decency to call it Battlestar Enterprise, so people would know that this travesty has nothing to do with the vision Gene Roddenberry had, en what gave a lot of people the name Trekkies.

You clearly haven't seen the new Battlestar Galactica. Trek couldn't be more different in tone.

This is Star Trek, just as the classic movies were, just as The Next Generation, Voyager, Deep Space Nine and even Enterprise were. All different spins on the same universe. What ever happened to IDIC? You know, that thing Gene Roddenberry came up with*